The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject. Please improve this article and discuss the issue on the talk page. (December 2010)

The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (April 2012)

Racial profiling refers to the use of an individual’s race or ethnicity by law enforcement personnel as a key factor in deciding whether to engage in enforcement (e.g. make a traffic stop or arrest). The practice is controversial and is illegal in some nations.

Definition[link]

The concept of racial profiling has been defined in many ways, including:

• "Any police-initiated action that relies on the race, ethnicity, or national origin rather than the behavior of an individual or information that leads the police to a particular individual who has been identified as being, or having been, engaged in criminal activity." _{-Deborah Ramirez, Jack McDevitt, Amy Farrell for US DoJ}^[1]

• "Racially-biased policing occurs when law enforcement inappropriately considers race or ethnicity in deciding with whom and how to intervene in an enforcement capacity."_{-Lorie Fridell, Robert Lunney, Drew Diamond and Bruce Kubu}^[2]

• "Using race as a key factor in deciding whether to make a traffic stop." _{-General Accounting Office}^[3]

• "In the literature to date, there appear to be at least two clearly distinguishable definitions of the term 'racial profiling': a narrow definition and a broad definition... Under the narrow definition, racial profiling occurs when a police officer stops, questions, arrests, and/or searches someone solely on the basis of the person's race or ethnicity... Under the broader definition, racial profiling occurs whenever police routinely use race as a factor that, along with an accumulation of other factors, causes an officer to react with suspicion and take action."_{-Jim Cleary}^[4]

• "Use by law enforcement personnel of an individual’s race or ethnicity as a factor in articulating reasonable suspicion to stop, question or arrest an individual, unless race or ethnicity is part of an identifying description of a specific suspect for a specific crime." _{-Office of the Arizona Attorney General}^[5]

In the United States[link]

Legality[link]

At a Federal level, racial profiling is challenged by the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which guarantees the right to be safe from unreasonable search and seizure without probable cause and the Fourteenth Amendment which requires that all citizens be treated equally under the law.

In his February 27, 2001, address to a Joint Session of Congress, President George W. Bush declared, "Racial profiling is wrong, and we will end it in America. In so doing, we will not hinder the work of our nation's brave police officers. They protect us every day -- often at great risk. But by stopping the abuses of a few, we will add to the public confidence our police officers earn and deserve."^[6]

In June 2001, the Bureau of Justice Assistance, a component of the Office of Justice Programs, United States Department of Justice, awarded the Northeastern research team a grant to create this web-based Racial Profiling Data Collection Resource Center. It now maintains a website designed to be a central clearinghouse for police agencies, legislators, community leaders, social scientists, legal researchers, and journalists to access information about current data collection efforts, legislation and model policies, police-community initiatives, and methodological tools that can be used to collect and analyze racial profiling data. The website contains information on the background of data collection, jurisdictions currently collecting data, community groups, legislation that is pending and enacted in states across the country, and has information on planning and implementing data collection procedures, training officers in to implement these systems, and analyzing and reporting the data and results.^[7]

On February 28, 2002, Attorney General John Ashcroft said "This administration... has been opposed to racial profiling and has done more to indicate its opposition than ever in history. The President said it’s wrong and we’ll end it in America, and I subscribe to that. Using race… as a proxy for potential criminal behavior is unconstitutional, and it undermines law enforcement undermining the confidence that people can have in law enforcement."^[6]

In June 2003, the Department of Justice issued its Guidance Regarding the Use of Race by Federal Law Enforcement Agencies forbidding racial profiling by federal law enforcement officials.^[8]

Several U.S. states now have reporting requirements. Texas, for example requires all agencies to provide annual reports to its Law Enforcement Commission. The requirement began on September 1, 2001, when the State of Texas passed a law to require all law enforcement agencies in the State to begin collecting certain data in connection to traffic or pedestrian stops beginning on January 1, 2002. Based on that data, the law mandated law enforcement agencies to submit a report to the law enforcement agencies' governing body beginning March 1, 2003 and each year thereafter no later than March 1. The law is found in the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure beginning with Article 2.131.^[9] Additionally, on January 1, 2011, all law enforcement agencies began submitting annual reports to the Texas State Law Enforcement Officers Standards and Education Commission. The submitted reports can be accessed on the Commission's website for public review.^[10]

History of Policies[link]

Threatened homeland security has been a constant reason to enact policies that permit racial profiling over the years. The history of racial profiling has roots established as early as the beginning of Japanese Interment and in many Supreme Court Cases such as the Terry v. Ohio in 1968. This case gave police officers the agency to stop suspects without probable cause to conduct searches and seizures without violating the Fourth Amendment. The connection of immigrant communities becoming racially profiled as a result of such policies have more recently developed in the passage of policies like the Patriot Act in 2001 and SB1070 in 2010.

Post 9/11, the racial profiling of the Muslim community has occurred under the guise of the Patriot Act passed in order to ensure homeland security.^[11] Border security issues gave rise to the passage of propositions 187 in 1994 and proposition 227 in 1998 (Department of Sociology at the University of California, Riverside). After the passage of SB1070, Mexican immigrant communities in Arizona have been targeted through the practice of racial profiling.^[12] Thinking of the notions homeland security and what it means to be an illegal alien creates a dialogue towards understanding why policies have been enacted to target immigrant communities of color for many years in the United States.

SB 1070[link]

In April 2010, Arizona enacted a law that would require law-enforcement officers to verify the citizenship of individuals they stop if they have reasonable suspicion. SB1070 was a way to help maintain control of immigration problems facing the United States. The law specifically states that “Any person who is arrested shall have the person’s immigration status determined before the person is released”. United States federal law requires that all aliens who remain in the United States for more than 30 days are to register with the U.S. government and to have all registration documents with them at all time. Arizona made it a misdemeanor crime for an alien 14 years of age and older to be found without carrying these documents at all times. Critics of this policy have questioned “what will the statute's effect on those who are legal residents of the United States?” A concern from this is that law-enforcement officials may not consider “race, color, or national origin” in the enforcement of the law, except under the circumstances allowed under the United States and Arizona constitutions.^[13] The Arizona Senate Bill 1070 has effect the Latino and Arab or Middle Eastern communities are the most affected due to certain preconceptions, beliefs and stereotypes.

Support[link]

Naiz Khan, target of an FBI terror investigation alleges racial profiling -- and lost his job as a result. In this image he is speaking at a press conference in Flushing, Queens.

Many in the law enforcement community argue that although unfortunate, the use of ethnic and racial profiling is both effective and necessary. The argument is made that due to socio-economic and demographic factors as unfortunate and undesirable as it might be, crime is simply higher in some communities that have a large minority population and that to ignore that fact due to a sense of moral integrity would be both morally and professionally wrong. As an example, an airport interdiction task force at Los Angeles International Airport compiled a report of those arrested based solely on officer observations, and when that report was compared to one of those arrested based on alerts driven by the airline passenger alert computer system the percentages were almost identical. Examples such as these support the conclusion that although factors such as race may be taken into account, it does not necessarily indicate that a prejudicial bias is present.

If the success of law enforcement is defined as identifying and taking action against violators, then racial profiling would allow officers to be more effective.^[14]

A majority of Americans support profiling as necessary "in today's society".^[15]

Criticism[link]

Critics of racial profiling argue that the individual rights of a suspect are violated if race is used as a factor in that suspicion. Notably, civil liberties organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have stated that racial profiling is a form of discrimination, stating, "Discrimination based on race, ethnicity, religion, nationality or on any other particular identity undermines the basic human rights and freedoms to which every person is entitled."^[16]

Critics argue that individuals should not be more or less likely to encounter law enforcement officers or other government agents based on racial or ethnic traits.

Responding to such criticisms are local community groups who seek to collect data, analyze trends and how they might correspond to public perceptions of profiling, and solicit ideas aimed at diminishing cultural and racial biases.^[17]

In practice[link]

• Despite promises to the contrary before the September 11 attacks in 2001, racial profiling surged during the presidency of George W. Bush, coinciding with the initiation of the War on Terror. Claims of profiling have been particularly focused on Naturalization, Customs, and Border Patrol agents accused of making Muslims' entry or re-entry into the United States more difficult and pressure-laden than that of their peers. According to a 2011 report from Brown University, this sort of profiling has been encouraged in public discourse by political TV personalities like Bill O'Reilly.^{[citation needed]}

• The airline ticketing agent who checked in Mohamed Atta, the leader of the September 11 attacks, and a companion, would afterwards say that looking at the pair his first reaction was to think, "If this doesn't look like two Arab terrorists, I've never seen two Arab terrorists." But he immediately felt guilty, and had no legal grounds to search on the basis of their suspicious appearance had he wished to.^[18]

• In December 2001, an American citizen of Middle Eastern descent named Assem Bayaa cleared all the security checks at Los Angeles airport and attempted to board a flight to New York. Upon boarding, he was told that he made the passengers uncomfortable by being on board the plane and was asked to leave. Once off the plane, he wasn't searched or questioned any further and the only consolation he was given was a boarding pass for the next flight. He filed a lawsuit on the basis of discrimination against United Airlines. United Airlines filed a counter motion which was dismissed by a district judge on October 11, 2002. In June 2005, the ACLU announced a settlement between Bayaa and United Airlines who still disputed Bayaa's allegations, but noted that the settlement "was in the best interest of all".^[19]

• In the case of racial profiling drivers, also known as "Driving While Black", the police officers’ judgments suggest biased policing on colored drivers.^[20] The term "Driving While Black" arose as a play on the U.S Crime "Driving While Intoxicated". It refers to the Criminalization of black drivers. Black drivers felt that they were being pulled over by law enforcement officers simply because of their skin color. Police officers observe many traffic violations throughout the day but they do not pull over every violator they see. So what triggers officers to decide whom to pull over? “Fear of crime itself,” explains a police officer whom stops African Americans or other colored races.^[20] A good example is the one of Québécois Joel Debellefeuille. Joel was pulled over by a police officer. The police report stated that the Québécois name "didn't match his skin tone."^[21] However, some argue the “veil of darkness” hypothesis, which states that police are less likely to know the race of a driver before they make a stop at nighttime as opposed to in the daytime. Referring the veil of darkness hypothesis, it is suggested that if the race distribution of drivers stopped during the day differs from that of drivers stopped at night, officers are engaging in racial profiling. For example, in one study done by Jeffrey Grogger and Greg Ridgeway, the veil of darkness hypothesis was used to determine whether or not racial profiling in traffic stops occurs in Oakland, California. If they know the racial variation in traffic patterns, driving behavior, and police intervention, then they can determine whether or not racial profiling occurs in the traffic stops made during the daytime and after dark. The conductors found that there was little evidence of racial profiling in traffic stops made in this particular city.^[22] Legislation has been proposed with the intent of ending racial profiling in traffic stops. There have been many states that have begun collecting data on the details of the traffic stops in order to monitor racial profiling. Profiling is on an individual basis and it is difficult to pinpoint the cause of arrests or stops since the studies allow officers to change their behavior accordingly. For example, in the court case of City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, Adolf Lyons was stopped by police officers because of a faulty taillight; police officers choked him until he was unconscious.^[23] Plaintiffs in the case promoted equality yet it was ultimately dependent on appearance and race. “Driving While Black” can be significantly defeated when the public comes together to take a stance against the racial profiling the African American and Latino population face. When the public voices their opinions on this issue and begins to stir up controversy, the media will become involved. This media coverage can make or break the police departments and government officials behind the “driving while black” scandal. In a recent journal comparing the 1990s to the present, studies have proven that when the community criticized police for targeting the black community during traffic stops it received more media coverage and toned down racial profiling. However, whenever there was a significant lack of media coverage or concern with racial profiling, the amount of arrests and traffic stops for the African-American community would significantly rise again.^[24]

Urban Communities[link]

Inner city residents of Latino communities are subjected to racial profiling because of theories such as the “gang suppression model”. The “gang suppression model” is often the basis for increased policing because the theory is based on the idea that Latinos are violent and out of control and therefore “in need of suppression”.^[25] Based on research, the criminalization of a people can lead to abuses of power on behalf of law enforcement.^[25]

On some occasions immigration authorities are known to target the residents of barrios with the use of violent and discriminatory policing based on racial profiling practices. There has been research done through random sampling in the South Tucson, Arizona area where this is the case.^[25] Immigration raids are often carried out at places of gathering and cultural expression such as grocery stores based on the fluency of language of a person (e.g. being bilingual especially in Spanish) and skin color of a person.^[26] Often the immigration raids are done with a disregard to due-process. These raids lead people from these communities to distrust law enforcement and not see them as a source of security and justice.^[26]

Islamophobia[link]

Legality[link]

It is clear that the U.S. Constitution prohibits discrimination based on race, but the racial profiling of the Islamic community continues and has grown since 9/11. As Samuel Gross and Debra Livingston argue, since September 11, the meaning of racial profiling changed and “is more likely to mean security checks or federal investigations that target Muslim men from Middle Eastern countries, in order to try to catch terrorist.” They also claim that there has been an increase in support for racial profiling. Before the attacks, more than 80% of Americans were against racial profiling and now more than 60% are in favor.^[27] This means more support for the USA Patriot Act of 2001 which “has undermined many of the fundamental constitutional rights of Arab and South Asian Americans."^[28] The Patriot Act used terrorism and national security as an excuse to make it legal to target Muslim communities.

Since the attacks of 9/11, the word terrorist has been associated with Muslim, and the Patriot Act was made to stop “terrorists” from harming the US. Because of the Patriot Act, “Arabs, Arab Americans and Muslims were disproportionately subjected to a myriad of abuses including secret evidence, denial of due process, indefinite detentions, airline profiling, illegal wiretapping and surveillance."^[29] The FBI and INS have arrested more than a thousand noncitizens which mostly happened to be Arab and/or Muslim even though they had no reason to arrest them.

In Practice[link]

The attacks on the World Trade Center on September 11 has led to targeting of Muslims in the United States as potential terrorists. Muslims and other Middle Easterners are profiled as potential terrorist and are targeted by the national government through preventive measures similar to those practiced by local law enforcement.^[30] The national government has passed laws, such as the Patriot Act of 2001, to increase surveillance of potential threats to national threat as a result of the events that occurred during 9/11.^[31] It is argued that the passage of these laws and provisions by the national government leads to justification of preventative methods, such as racial profiling, that has been controversial for racial profiling and leads to further minority distrust in the national government.^[32] One of the techniques used by the FBI to target Muslims was monitoring 100 mosques and business in Washington DC and threatened to deport Muslims who did not agree to serve as informers.^[33] The FBI denied to be taking part of blanket profiling and argued that they were trying to build trust within the Muslim community.^[34]

The events of 9/11 also led to restrictions on immigration laws.^[35] The government imposed stricter immigration quotas to maintain national security at their national borders. In 2002, men over sixteen years old who entered the country from twenty-five Middle Eastern countries and North Korea were required to be photographed, fingerprinted, interviewed and have their financial information copied, and had to register again before leaving the country.^[36]

Criminal Profiling[link]

When confronted with accusations of racial profiling the police don’t believe that they participate in it. They believe that they use numerous factors (such as race, interactions, and dress) to determine if a person is involved in criminal activity. They conclude that the job of policing is far more imperative then to continuously worry about minorities or interest groups crying foul or complaining about being victims of unfair targeting.^[37]

Law Enforcement[link]

Racial profiling not only occurs on the streets how also in many Institutions. Much like the book "Famous all over Town" where the author Danny Santiago mentions this type of Racism throughout the novel. Racial Profiling is huge in Law Enforcement, where this type of behavior can risk the lives of innocent people. In a trusted source it says here "It is argued that, given the assumption that criminals are currently being punished too severely in Western countries, the apprehension of more criminals may not constitute a reason in favor of racial profiling at all."(Ryberg) It has been stated in a scholarly journal that for over 30 years the use of racial and/or demographic profiling by local authorities and higher level law enforcement's continue to proceed. NYPD Street cops use racial profiling more often, due to the widespread patterns. They first frisk them to check whether they have enough evidence to be even arrested for the relevant crime. "As a practical matter, the stops display a measurable racial disparity: black and Hispanic people generally represent more than 85 percent of those stopped by the police, though their combined populations make up a small share of the city’s racial composition."(Baker)

Some general examples of racial profiling by police[link]

A few examples of racial profiling by police include: • An African American man standing on a corner waiting for a bus is stopped and questioned regarding why he is standing there and where he is going. • A Hispanic driver is stopped in a “white” neighbourhood because he “doesn’t belong there” or “looks out of place.” • A group of black teenagers are pulled over because of the kind of car they are driving. • Any person of color stopped for minor traffic violations and then questioned about where there are going, or if they have illegal drugs or weapons in their possession. Racial profiling is also used as a basis of discrimination for employment, services, housing, etc., or to give preferential treatment to an individual or group of people because of their race or ethnicity.^[37]

Racial profiling in practice[link]

On September 14, 2001, an Indian American motorist and three family members were pulled over and ticketed by a Maryland state trooper because their car had broken taillights. The trooper interrogated the family, questioned them about their nationality, and asked for proof of citizenship. When the motorist said that their passports were at home, the officer allegedly stated, "You are lying. You are Arabs involved in terrorism." He ordered them out of the car, had them put their hands on the hood, and searched the car. When he discovered a knife in a toolbox, the officer handcuffed the driver and later reported that the driver "wore and carried a butcher knife, a dangerous deadly weapon, concealed upon and about his person." The driver was detained for several hours but eventually released.^[38]

Empirical evidence[link]

Statistical data demonstrates, that although policing practices and policies vary widely across the United States, a large disparity between racial groups in regards to traffic stops and searches. However, whether this is disparity is due to racial profiling or the fact that different races are involved in crime in different rates, is still highly debated. Based on academic search, various studies have been conducted regarding the existence of racial profiling in traffic and pedestrian stops.For motor vehicle searches academic research showed that the probability of a successful search is very similar across races. This suggests that police officers are not motivated by racial preferences but by the desire to maximize the probability of a successful search. Similar evidence has been found for pedestrian stops, with identical ratios of stops to arrests for different races.^[14][39] Because of the controversial nature if this topic various studies yielded different results. The studies have been published in various Academic Journals aimed towards Academic professionals as well practitioners such as law enforcers. Some of these journals include, Police Quarterly and the Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, so that both sides of the argument are present and evaluated. Of those gathered the most noted study refuting racial profiling was the conducted using the veil of darkness hypothesis stating that it will be difficult, if not impossible, for officers to discern race in the twilight hours. The results of this study concluded that the ratio of different races stopped by New York cops is about the same for all races tested.^[40] Some of the most referenced organizations, who offer evidence on the existence of racial profiling, noted are The American Civil Liberties Union, which has conducted studies various major U.S. cities, and RAND. In a study conducted in have Cincinnati, Ohio it was concluded that “Blacks were between three and five times more likely to (a) be asked if they were carrying drugs or weapons, (b) be asked to leave the vehicle, (c) be searched, (d) have a passenger searched, and (e) have the vehicle physically searched in a study conducted. This conclusion was based on the analysis of 313, randomly selected, traffic stop police tapes gathered from 2003 to 2004.^[41]

Public Opinion[link]

Perceptions of Race and Safety[link]

In a particular study, Higgins, Gabbidon, and Vito studied the relationship between public opinion on racial profiling in conjunction with their viewpoint of race relations and their perceived awareness of safety. It was found that race relations had a statistical correlation with the legitimacy of racial profiling. Specifically, results showed that those who believed that racial profiling was widespread and that racial tension would never be fixed were more likely to be opposed to racial profiling than those who did not believe racial profiling was as widespread or that racial tensions would be fixed eventually. On the other hand, in reference to perception of safety, the research concluded that one’s perception of safety had no influence on public opinion of racial profiling. Higgins, Gabbidon, and Vito acknowledge that this may not have been the case immediately after 9/11, but state that any support of racial profiling based on safety was “short-lived”.^[42]

Influence of Religious Affiliation[link]

One particular study focused on individuals who self-identified as religiously affiliated and their relationship with racial profiling. By using national survey data from October 2001, researcher Phillip H. Kim studied which individuals were more likely to support racial profiling. The research concludes that individuals that identified themselves as either Jewish, Catholic, or Protestant showed higher statistical numbers that illustrated support for racial profiling in comparison to individuals who identified themselves as non-religious.^[43]

The Context of Terrorism and Crime[link]

After the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, according to Johnson, a new debate concerning the appropriateness of racial profiling in the context of terrorism took place. According to Johnson, prior to the September 11, 2001 attacks the debate on racial profiling within the public targeted primarily African-Americans and Latino Americans with enforced policing on crime and drugs. The attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon changed the focus of the racial profiling debate from street crime and “driving while Black” to terrorism and “flying while Arab.” According to a June 4–5, 2002 FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll, 54% of Americans approved of using “racial profiling to screen Arab male airline passengers.” A 2002 survey by Public Agenda tracked the attitudes toward the racial profiling of Blacks and people of Middle Eastern descent. In this survey, 52% of Americans said there was “no excuse” for law enforcement to look at African Americans with greater suspicion and scrutiny because they believe they are more likely to commit crimes, but only 21% said there was “no excuse” for extra scrutiny of Middle Eastern people.^[44]

However, using data from an internet survey based experiment performed in 2006 on a random sample of 574 adult university students, a study was conducted that examined public approval for the use of racial profiling to prevent crime and terrorism. It was found that approximately one third of students approved the use of racial profiling in general. Furthermore, it was found that students were equally likely to approve of the use of racial profiling to prevent crime as to prevent terrorism-33% and 35.8% respectively. The survey also asked respondents whether they would approve of racial profiling across different investigative contexts. It was found that 23.8% of people approved of law enforcement using racial profiling as a means to stop and question someone in a terrorism context while 29.9% of people approved of racial profiling in a crime context for the same situation. It was found that 25.3% of people approved of law enforcement using racial profiling as a means to search someone’s bags or packages in a terrorism context while 33.5% of people approved of racial profiling in a crime context for the same situation. It was also found that 16.3% of people approved of law enforcement wire tapping a person’s phone based upon racial profiling in the context of terrorism while 21.4% of people approved of racial profiling in a crime context for the same situation. It was also found that 14.6% of people approved of law enforcement searching someone’s home based upon racial profiling in a terrorism context while 18.2% of people approved of racial profiling in a crime context for the same situation.^[44]

The study also found that white students were more likely to approve of racial profiling to prevent terrorism than nonwhite students. However, it was found that white students and nonwhite students held the same views about racial profiling in the context of crime. It was also found that foreign born students were less likely to approve of racial profiling to prevent terrorism than non-foreign born students while both groups shared similar views on racial profiling in the context of crime.^[44]

In other countries[link]

Canada[link]

Accusations of racial profiling of visible minorities who accuse police of targeting them due to their ethnic background is a growing concern in Canada. In 2005, the Kingston Police released the first study ever in Canada which pertains to racial profiling. The study focused on in the city of Kingston, a small city where most of the inhabitants are white. The study showed that black skinned people were 3.7 times more likely to be pulled over by police than white skinned people, while Asian people were less likely to be pulled over than whites or blacks.^[45] Several police organizations condemned this study and suggested more studies like this would make them hesitant to pull over visible minorities.

Canadian Aboriginals are more likely to be charged with crimes, particularly on reserves. The Canadian crime victimization survey does not collect data on the ethnic origin of perpetrators, so comparisons between incidence of victimizations and incidence of charging are impossible.^[46] Although aboriginal persons make up 3.6% of Canada's population, they account for 20% of Canada's prison population. This may show how racial profiling increases effectiveness of police, or be a result of racial profiling, as they are watched more intensely than others.^[47]

In February 2010, an investigation of the Toronto Star daily newspaper found that black people across Toronto were three times more likely to be stopped and documented by police than white people. To a lesser extent, the same seemed true for people described by police as having "brown" skin. This was the result of an analysis of 1.7 million contact cards filled out by Toronto Police officers in the period 2003 - 2008.^[48]

The Ontario Human Rights Commission states that "police services have acknowledged that racial profiling does occur and have taken [and are taking] measures to address [the issue], including upgrading training for officers, identifying officers at risk of engaging in racial profiling, and improving community relations"^[49](Griffiths, 2008, p. 311). Ottawa Police addressed this issue and planned on implementing a new policy regarding officer racially profiling persons, "the policy explicitly forbids officers from investigating or detaining anyone based on their race and will force officers to go through training on racial profiling"^[50](CTV News, 2011). This policy was implemented after the 2008 incident where an African-Canadian woman was strip searched by members of the Ottawa police. There is a video showing the strip search where one witnesses the black woman being held to the ground and the having her bra and shirt cut ripped/cut off by a member of the Ottawa Police Force which was released to the viewing of the public in 2010^[51](CTV News, 2011).

See also[link]

• Affirmative action
• Contempt of cop
• De-policing
• Driving While Black
• Police misconduct
• Race and crime in the United States
• Arrest of Henry Louis Gates
• Edward C. Lawson

References[link]

Resources[link]

Jeff Shantz. 2010. Racial Profiling and Borders: International, Interdisciplinary Perspectives (Lake Mary: Vandeplas).

Ronald Weitzer and Steven Tuch. 2006. Race and Policing in America: Conflict and Reform (New York: Cambridge University Press).

Ryberg, Jesper. "Racial Profiling And Criminal Justice." Journal Of Ethics 15.1/2 (2011): 79-88. Academic Search Premier. Web. 26 Apr. 2012.

Ruiz, James, Jason W. Julseth, and Kathleen H. Winters. "Profiling, Cajun Style: The FBI Investigation?." International Journal Of Police Science & Management 12.3 (2010): 401-425. Academic Search Premier. Web. 26 Apr. 2012.

Baker, Al. "Judge Declines to Dismiss Case Alleging Racial Profiling by City Police in Street Stops." The New York Times. Nytimes.com, 31 Aug. 2011. Web. 26 Apr. 2012. <www.nytimes.com>.

Resources[link]

Jeff Shantz. 2010. Racial Profiling and Borders: International, Interdisciplinary Perspectives (Lake Mary: Vandeplas).

External links[link]

This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (February 2008)

• An Investigation by the Joint Legislative Task Force on Government Oversight into Racial Profiling Practices by the California Highway Patrol as part of a program known as Operation Pipeline
• Bureau of Justice Criminal Offender Statistics
• Rational Profiling in America's Airports (Law Review Article)
• CBC backgrounder on racial profiling in Canada.
• "Ethnic Profiling: A Rational and Moral Framework", by Robert A. Levy (Cato Institute, October 2, 2001)
• "Racial Profiling in an Age of Terrorism", By Peter Siggins (Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, March 12, 2002)

Don Lemon
On the National Mall during the 2009 inauguration of Barack Obama
Born	(1966-03-01) March 1, 1966 (age 46) Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Residence	Atlanta, Georgia
Education	Brooklyn College Louisiana State University
Occupation	Journalist

Don Lemon (born March 1, 1966) is an American journalist and news presenter, best known as the host of the prime-time weekend edition of CNN Newsroom, based in Atlanta, Georgia.^[1]

Biography[link]

Early life[link]

Don Lemon was born on March 1, 1966 in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. He majored in broadcast journalism at Brooklyn College in Brooklyn, New York, and also attended Louisiana State University.^[1][2]

While in college, Lemon worked as a news assistant at WNYW (TV 5 in New York City). He has also reported as a weekend anchor for WCAU (TV 10 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania); anchor and investigative reporter for KTVI (TV 2 in St. Louis); and anchor for WBRC (TV 6 in Birmingham, Alabama).^[1]

He reported for NBC News' New York City operations, including working as a correspondent for Today and NBC Nightly News and an anchor on Weekend Today and MSNBC. In August 2003 he began at NBC O&O station WMAQ-TV (5 in Chicago), and was a reporter and the 5 p.m. local news co-anchor.^[1]

Lemon joined CNN in September 2006.^[1] Lemon has been outspoken in his work at CNN, criticizing the state of cable news and questioning the network publicly.^[3]

Personal life[link]

During an on-air interview with members of Bishop Eddie Long's congregation on September 25, 2010, Lemon said that he was a victim of sex abuse as a child, and that it wasn't until he was thirty that he told his mother about it.^{[4][dead link]}

In his memoir, Transparent, released in May 2011, Lemon acknowledges publicly that he is gay^[5] and discusses colorism in the black community, racism, homophobia, and the sexual abuse that he suffered as a child.^[6]

Lemon lives in Atlanta, Georgia.

Honors and awards[link]

Lemon won an Emmy Award for a special report on the real estate market in Chicago.^[7] He received an Edward R. Murrow Award for his coverage of the capture of the D.C. area sniper,^[8] and a number of other awards for reports on Hurricane Katrina, and the AIDS epidemic in Africa.

Lemon was voted as one of the 150 most influential African Americans by Ebony magazine in 2009.^[9]

References[link]

Benjamin "The Merjle Man" Ferguson (born August 28, 1981) is an American radio host, conservative political commentator, and author. His nationally-syndicated radio show, The Ben Ferguson Show, formerly aired throughout the United States on Radio America and is now syndicated by ICON Radio Network, of which Ben is the founder and owner.^[1] He is a frequent guest on Fox News Channel, MSNBC, CNBC, Fox Business, CNN, and CNN Headline News, commenting on politics.

Early life and education[link]

Ben Ferguson was born to Bruce and Karen Ferguson on August 28, 1981. He has an older sister, Holly. Ferguson was homeschooled by his mother through the tenth grade. A local talk-radio host throughout his teens, Ferguson graduated from Westminster Academy. He went on to the University of Mississippi,^[2] intending to play tennis and became a member of Kappa Alpha Order Fraternity.^[3] He graduated from Ole Miss in 2004.

He lives in Memphis, Tennessee. He is one of the youngest nationally-syndicated radio personalities in the United States. Paul Westcott, host of the White House Brief, is currently the youngest at the age of 26. Previously he hosted a weeknight talk show on WOAI San Antonio, Texas. In August 2007, Ferguson joined 600 WREC in Memphis as their morning radio host. He was then moved to the afternoon drive show from 4-7 PM CT.^[4] On April 20, 2010, Ferguson resigned from WREC. In a statement he said, "I have left the station, effective today. I’m looking forward to a new market and a new show, in addition to my national show and my continuing appearances on such networks as CNBC, CNN and MSNBC."

Later, it was stated that Ferguson left WREC after an impasse in contract negotiations. It was then announced that Ben Ferguson will take over the 4-7 PM slot on another local radio station, KWAM. Controversial radio host Thaddeus Matthews was fired to make room for Ferguson.

On April 1, 2012, Ferguson became the regular fill-in for Mark Davis on WBAP in Texas, as Davis was involved in contract disputes with the new owners of WBAP, Cumulus Media. When a new contract could not be reached between Mark Davis and Cumulus, Ferguson became the permanent host of the 9 - 11 AM CT time slot. ^[5]

Political activities[link]

Ferguson is a member of Students for Saving Social Security (S4). In July 2005, as S4's political director, Ferguson was selected by the White House to join President Bush and Ben Stein for a town hall meeting in an effort to educate the public on the issue of social security reform. Ferguson also spends several weeks a year on the road speaking at youth leadership conferences, high schools and college campuses nationwide. He has become a regular keynote speaker for several groups, including Congressional Youth Leadership and Lead America.

Ferguson is an avid critic of former Memphis Mayor W. W. Herenton. When Herenton resigned and then decided to run again for mayor not two weeks later, Ferguson entered the political scene and pulled a petition to run for Memphis City Mayor.^[6] He withdrew from the election when Herenton also withdrew.

MormonVoices, a group associated with Foundation for Apologetic Information & Research, included Ferguson on its Top Ten Anti-Mormon Statements of 2011 list for stating "Can you name the candidate that's running for president that believes that if he's a good person in his religion he will receive his own planet? … Would you vote for someone for president who believes in their religion, if he's a good person, he'll get his own planet? … Do you want to get your own planet?"^[7]

Media exposure[link]

Ferguson's national talk-radio show focuses on current events from a conservative point of view. The Ben Ferguson Show can be heard over ICON Radio Network weekly on Sunday evenings from 7-10 PM ET.

Ferguson hosted a local radio show in Memphis during evening drive time slot (from 4-7 PM) weekdays on WREC (600 AM) in Memphis until April 20, 2010.^[8] On May 3, 2010, KWAM 990 announced that he would be their new evening drive time host.^[9] On April 25, 2011, Ben moved to WKIM 98.9 FM, coinciding with a format change in the station to an all-talk network.^[10]

Ferguson also appears frequently on Fox News Channel, MSNBC, CNBC, Fox Business, CNN, and CNN Headline News.

Republican National Convention Appearance[link]

Ferguson addressed the 2004 Republican National Convention. His speech was quoted in various news outlets, including the Chicago Tribune, Toronto Star and Pittsburgh Post Gazette.

Bibliography[link]

• It's My America Too: A Leading Young Conservative Shares His Views on Politics and Other Matters of Importance, 2004, William Morrow (ISBN 0-06-059011-4)

External links[link]

• Ferguson's Network Talk Show Website
• Ferguson's WREC 600 Website
• Talk Shows USA Announcement
• News Article on His Departure from WREC

References[link]

1. ^ http://www.iconradionetwork.com/
2. ^ Local, International Journalists Intrigued with Debate and University Ole Miss (accessed April 23, 2010)
3. ^ Newsletter KAPPA ALPHA AT OLE MISS, June 2003 (accessed April 23, 2010)
4. ^ http://www.600wrec.com/pages/benferguson.html?_show
5. ^ http://ben.wbap.com/?page_id=13
6. ^ http://memphisnewsblog.com/2009/08/ec-jones-sharon-webb-ben-ferguson-pull-petitions-for-mayors-race.html
7. ^ Walker, Joseph (January 8, 2012). "Group lists Top Ten Anti-Mormon Statements of 2011". Deseret News. http://www.deseretnews.com/article/print/700213557/Group-lists-Top-Ten-Anti-Mormon-Statements-of-2011.html. 
8. ^ Dowd, James WREC-AM talk show host Ben Ferguson leaves stationThe Commercial Appeal, April 20, 2010 (accessed May 3, 2010)
9. ^ Dowd, James Radio show host Ferguson heads to KWAM 990The Commercial Appeal, May 3, 2010 (accessed May 3, 2010)
10. ^ Dowd, JamesMemphis conservative talker Ben Ferguson jumps to Citadel's WKIM-FM 98.9The Commercial Appeal, April 26, 2011 (accessed August 11, 2011)

The fatal shooting of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman took place on February 26, 2012, in Sanford, Florida, United States. Trayvon Martin was a 17-year-old African American male who was unarmed.^[2] George Zimmerman was a 28-year-old multi-racial Hispanic American,^{[3][Note 1]} who was the community watch coordinator for the gated community where the shooting took place.^{[5][6][7][8][9]}

While on a private errand, Zimmerman saw Martin walking inside the gated community where Martin and his father were visiting his father's fiancée. Zimmerman called the Sanford Police Department to report Martin's behavior as suspicious.^[10] Shortly afterwards, there was an altercation, which ended with Zimmerman fatally shooting Martin once in the chest at close range.^{[11][12][13][14][15]}

When police arrived on the scene Zimmerman told them that Martin had attacked him and that he had shot Martin in self-defense.^[2][16] Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose and two vertical lacerations on the back of his head.^[17][18] EMTs treated Zimmerman at the scene, after which he was taken to the Sanford Police Department. Zimmerman was detained and questioned for approximately five hours.^[19][18] A statement was videotaped, and he was then released without being charged.^[17] Police said that they had not found evidence to contradict his assertion of self-defense.^{[20][21][22][23][24]}

The circumstances of Martin's death, the initial decision not to charge Zimmerman, and questions about Florida's Stand Your Ground law received national and international attention. Allegations of racist motivation for the shooting and police conduct contributed to public demands for Zimmerman's arrest.^[25][26][27] A Special Prosecutor was appointed to take over the investigation and on April 11, 2012, she chose to file charges of murder in the second degree against Zimmerman.^[28][29] Zimmerman then turned himself in and was placed in custody.^[30][31] On April 20, the judge approved Zimmerman's bail on a $150,000 bond.^[32] He was released from jail on April 23 and is required to wear an electronic monitoring device until trial.

People involved in the case[link]

George Zimmerman

Trayvon Martin[link]

Trayvon ( /treɪˈvɔːn/ tray-VAWN) Benjamin Martin (February 5, 1995 – February 26, 2012) was the son of Sybrina Fulton and Tracy Martin, who were divorced in 1999.^[33] The autopsy report stated he was 5 feet 11 inches and 158 pounds.^[34]

He was a high school junior in the Miami, Florida, area and had recently turned 17.^[35][36] Martin lived with his mother and older brother in Miami Gardens, Florida. He had been taken by his father to Sanford, Florida, following a ten-day suspension from high school.^{[37][38] [39]} They were visiting his father's fiancée and her son at her townhome in The Retreat at Twin Lakes in Sanford on the day Martin was fatally shot.^[40]

George Zimmerman[link]

George Michael Zimmerman^[41] was born on October 5, 1983, in Manassas, Virginia,^[42] and is the son of Robert Zimmerman, Sr., a retired Virginia magistrate,^[43] and Peruvian-born Gladys (née Mesa) Zimmerman.^[5][8] He grew up in what his father has described as a "multiracial family" (one of his maternal great-grandfathers was of Afro-Peruvian background),^[44] and was raised in his mother's Catholic religion (his father was Baptist).^[4] Zimmerman's voter registration record lists him as Hispanic and a Democrat.^[45][46]

Zimmerman's height is shown as 5'8" and his weight as 185 pounds on his Seminole County Sheriff's Office Inmate Booking Information dated 4/11/2012.^[47] Zimmerman's height is shown as 5'7" and his weight at 200 pounds on the Sanford Police Department Offense Report for 2/26/2012.^[48]

In 2009, he moved with his wife to The Retreat at Twin Lakes in Sanford, Florida, a multi-ethnic^[49] gated community, where the shooting occurred.^[50][51] He was employed as an insurance underwriter prior to the shooting^[52] and was in his final semester at Seminole State College for an Associates degree in Criminal Justice.^[53] His goal was to become a police officer.^[54]

Zimmerman's role in the neighborhood watch[link]

As the only person to volunteer when the homeowners association wanted to organize a community watch,^[55] Zimmerman was appointed coordinator by his neighbors, according to Wendy Dorival, Neighborhood Watch organizer for the Sanford Police Department.^[56] The homeowner's association told residents who saw suspicious activity to call Zimmerman if they could not contact the police.^[57] "[Zimmerman] once caught a thief and an arrest was made," said Cynthia Wibker, secretary of the homeowners association.^[55]

Police had been called to The Retreat at Twin Lakes 402 times from January 1, 2011, to February 26, 2012.^[55] Zimmerman was the caller on 11 of those calls in that time frame. Crimes committed at The Retreat in the year prior to Martin's death included eight burglaries, nine thefts, dozens of break-ins (at least one with a woman and infant upstairs) and one shooting. In September, Zimmerman was asked to head up a neighborhood watch.^[55] The City of Sanford posted a "George Zimmerman 911 Call History" listing 46 calls by him between 2004 and the 2012 shooting.^{[58][59][60][Note 2]}

Zimmerman had been licensed to carry a firearm since November 2009. An officer with Seminole County Animal Services had told Zimmerman not to rely on pepper spray to fend off a loose pit bull in the neighborhood; he told Zimmerman to "get a gun." Zimmerman had called the owner to complain about the dog after it had cornered his wife, and then called animal services on two other occasions to report that the dog was running loose.^[53]

Sanford police chief Bill Lee stated that neighborhood watch volunteers are not encouraged to carry a gun but have a Constitutional right to do so.^[55] Lee further stated, "Mr. Zimmerman was not acting outside the legal boundaries of Florida Statute by carrying his weapon when this incident occurred."^[64]

Sanford Police volunteer program coordinator Wendy Dorival, told the Miami Herald that she met Zimmerman in September, 2011 at a community neighborhood watch presentation. “I said, ‘If it’s someone you don’t recognize, call us. We’ll figure it out,’  ‘Observe from a safe location.’ Dorival said.”^[55]

Police[link]

According to ABC News and other media organizations, multiple sources had indicated to them that Chris Serino, the lead investigator for the Sanford Police on the night of the shooting, stated in a February 26, 2012 affidavit that he was unconvinced by Zimmerman's version of events.^[65] Based on Serino's February 26 affidavit, police sought an arrest warrant for Zimmerman, however that request was denied by the Office of the State Attorney for insufficient evidence.^{[65][66][67][21][22][23][68]}

On March 13, 2012, Chris Serino sent a capias request to the state's attorney asking for George Zimmerman to be charged with manslaughter.^[69][70] Serino stated in the request that "the encounter between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin was ultimately avoidable by Zimmerman, if Zimmerman had remained in his vehicle and waited the arrival of law enforcement or conversely if he had identified himself to Martin as a concerned citizen and initiated dialog (sic) in an effort to dispel each party's concern". "There is no indication that Trayvon Martin was involved in any criminal activity at the time of the encounter."^[71] The state attorney's office initially did not act on the request for an arrest warrant.^[70]

On March 16, 2012, Serino told the Orlando Sentinel that his investigation had turned up no reliable evidence that cast doubt on Zimmerman's account, that he had acted in self-defense. "The best evidence we have is the testimony of George Zimmerman, and he says the decedent was the primary aggressor in the whole event, everything I have is adding up to what he says."^[67]

When special prosecutor Angela Corey was asked by the Miami Herald to confirm that the Sanford Police had initially recommended a manslaughter charge, she stated, "I don't know about that, but as far as the process, I can tell you that the police went to the state attorney with a capias request, meaning; We're through with our investigation and here it is for you." A capias is a request for charges to be filed. A source in the Seminole County State Attorney's office told the Miami Herald, "We get capias warrants all the time. That doesn't mean we file charges right away. We investigate to see if it's appropriate. That's the responsible thing to do.^[72]

Bill Lee, Chief of Police at the time of the shooting, received criticism for his role in the case. The Sanford city commission, including the Mayor, passed a motion of no confidence in regards to Chief Lee, and his handling of the case^[73] although the vote was advisory only.^[74] On March 22, 2012, Lee announced that he had temporarily stepped down from his position as chief of police, stating "my involvement in this matter is overshadowing the process."^[75] On April 23, 2012, the city of Sanford announced that Police Chief Bill Lee would resign but city commissioners voted to reject the resignation. Some commissioners had concerns about the fairness of Lee losing his job and the mayor stated he preferred to wait for the results of an investigation into Lee and his department. Lee was to remain on paid leave.^[76]

State Attorneys[link]

Norm Wolfinger was the state's attorney initially responsible for the case.^[77] He is responsible for prosecutions in Brevard and Seminole counties, where the shooting occurred.^[78]

On March 22, 2012, Florida Governor Rick Scott announced that he was appointing Angela Corey to be Special Prosecutor and that she would be investigating the case instead of Wolfinger.^[79] She is the State attorney for Duval, Clay and Nassau counties.^[80] After several weeks of investigation, Corey announced on April 11, 2012, that Zimmerman had been charged with second-degree murder.^[28][81]

George Zimmerman's attorneys[link]

Craig Sonner and Hal Uhrig were the first lawyers to represent George Zimmerman.^[82][83] On April 10, 2012, they announced at a news conference that they were withdrawing from the case as Zimmerman was no longer returning their calls and had been acting against their advice.^[84] According to Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, Sonner and Uhrig should not have disclosed those details and other information about Zimmerman after they had stopped representing him, because of considerations of attorney-client privileged information.^[85]

On April 11, 2012, it was announced that Zimmerman was represented by a new attorney, Mark M. O'Mara,^[30] who is board-certified as a criminal trial specialist.^[86] O'Mara pointed out that a small number of murder cases actually go to trial, with many cases resulting in a plea bargain. "We're not taking any possibilities off the table how this case gets resolved," he said. O'Mara described the intensely debated encounter between Martin and Zimmerman as resulting in "a deceased child," and also said, "Obviously, it was a horrible intersection of two young men's lives and it ended in tragedy."^[87][88] George Zimmerman's defense team has set up a Twitter account, a Facebook page and a website with a defense fund registered with the Florida Division of Consumer Services. O'Mara stated on the website that "Using social media in a high-profile lawsuit is new, and relatively unprecedented, but that is only because social media itself is relatively new. We feel it would be irresponsible to ignore the robust online conversation, and we feel equally as strong about establishing a professional, responsible, and ethical approach to new media."^[89][90][91]

Martin family attorneys[link]

Benjamin Crump, the lawyer representing the interests of the Martin family, operates a law firm in Tallahassee, Florida, with his partner Daryl Parks. The firm has eight lawyers who focus on wrongful death, malpractice, personal injury and civil rights.^[92][93] In 2006, Crump sued to have the video released in the case of Martin Anderson, a teenager who died at a boot camp run by the Bay County, Florida, Sheriff's Office.^[92][94][95] The Martin family is also represented by Natalie Jackson, an Orlando civil rights attorney.^[96][97]

Shooting[link]

Martin was staying with his father at the home of his father's fiancée.^[40] On his return from a convenience store,^[98][99] he was observed by Zimmerman,^[100] who was driving in his vehicle on a personal errand.^[101] At the end of their interaction, Martin was shot 70 yards (64 meters) from the rear door of the fiancée's townhouse.^{[102][Note 3]}

Zimmerman's early February, 2012, cell phone call to police[link]

Three weeks prior to the shooting, on February 2, 2012, Zimmerman placed a call to the Sanford Police Department to report a young man peering into the windows of an empty Twin Lakes home. Zimmerman was told a police car was on the way, and he followed protocol, awaiting their arrival. By the time police showed up, the suspect had fled. On February 6, 2012, workers witnessed two young black men lingering in the yard of a Twin Lakes resident around the same time her home was burglarized. A new laptop and some gold jewelry were stolen. The next day police discovered the stolen laptop in the backpack of a young black man, which led to his arrest. Zimmerman identified this young man as the same person he had spotted peering into windows on February 2.^[53]

Zimmerman's February 26, 2012, call to police[link]

While driving through the Twin Lakes neighborhood, at approximately 7:09:34 PM, February 26, 2012, Zimmerman used his cell phone to call the non-emergency number of the Sanford Police Department^[104] to report what he considered suspicious behavior by Martin. "We've had some break-ins in my neighborhood, and there's a real suspicious guy."^[53] He described Martin as "just walking around looking about" in the rain.^[105] The police dispatcher tape recorded him saying, "This guy looks like he is up to no good or he is on drugs or something." He further stated that the person he was observing had his hand in his waistband, was holding something in his other hand, and was walking around slowly in the rain "looking at all the houses."^[106] On the recording of the call, Zimmerman is heard commenting "these assholes, they always get away."^{[107][108][109]}

At 2:07 minutes into his call to the police, Zimmerman says, "he's running." At 2:37 minutes, Zimmerman tells the dispatcher, "he ran." The sound of an "open door" chime, a change in Zimmerman's voice and the sound of wind indicate that Zimmerman has left his vehicle, prompting the dispatcher to ask if Zimmerman is following Martin. When Zimmerman confirms that he is, the dispatcher says, "We don't need you to do that."^[110] Zimmerman says "OK." Asked if he "want(s) to meet with the officer," Zimmerman says "yeah" and gives directions to where his vehicle is parked but is unable to provide an address. He also tells the dispatcher the numbers of his street address, and then at 3:35 adds, "Oh crap, I don't want to give it all out. I don't know where this kid is." The dispatcher asks him if he wants to meet the police at the mailboxes,^{[Note 3, 4th picture]} and he at first agrees but then says, "Actually, could you have him call me, and I'll tell him where I'm at?" to which the dispatcher replies, "No problem."^[111] Zimmerman appears to hang up at the 4:05 mark. The recording ends at the 4:11 mark, approximately 7:13:41 PM.

Martin cell phone call from girlfriend[link]

Around the time of the incident, Martin was talking on his cellphone to his girlfriend, according to Attorney Benjamin Crump and State Prosecutor's, which was confirmed by phone company records.^[113][114] She called at 7:12 PM, although phone company records round down call times. Hence, the actual call was between 7:12:00 and 7:12:59 PM.^[115][116] She was interviewed by Crump who made a statement for her, as her parents requested her anonymity, and gave a sworn interview recorded by a state prosecutor.^[113][114]

Martin's girlfriend said that he described a man as "crazy and creepy," who was on the phone watching him from a vehicle, before the man started following him.^[114] The friend said that she told Martin to run to the townhouse, where he was staying with his father and the father's girlfriend.^[114] She said that Martin told her that he had lost the man and then noticed he was being pursued again.^[113][114] She then heard Martin say "What are you following me for?" followed by a man's voice responding, "What are you doing around here?"^[113][114] She said that she heard the sound of pushing^[113] and then heard Martin say what sounded like "get off, get off," and the call ended.^[114] She attempted to call him back immediately, but was unable to reach him.^[117]

Sanford Police arrival and initial investigation[link]

Police officer Timothy Smith arrived at the scene at approximately 7:17 PM. He reported finding Zimmerman standing near Martin, who was lying face down in the grass and unresponsive.^[14][17] At that time, Zimmerman stated to Smith that he had shot Martin and was still armed. Smith handcuffed Zimmerman and removed his weapon from him. Smith observed that Zimmerman's back was wet and covered with grass and he was bleeding from the nose and the back of his head.^[14][118]

Ricardo Ayala, the second officer to arrive that night, noticed Officer Smith had Zimmerman in custody, then observed Martin lying face down in the grass and attempted to get a response from him. At this time, Sgt. Anthony Raimondo arrived and together with Ayala began CPR. Paramedics from Sanford Fire and Rescue arrived and continued CPR, finally declaring him dead at 7:30 PM^[14]

Other officers who had arrived by this time secured the area and made contact with neighbors in the area and obtained statements from witnesses at the scene. They did not realize Zimmerman had been in a vehicle, however, so it was moved before they could seize it.^[119] Zimmerman was treated and released by paramedics while still at the scene of the incident.^[14][118] After placing Zimmerman in his police vehicle, Officer Smith heard Zimmerman say, "I was yelling for someone to help me, but no one would help me."^[14][120] Zimmerman was then transported to the Sanford Police Department where he was questioned by investigators for approximately five hours.^[14][19]

Martin's body was taken to the morgue where he was tagged as a John Doe as he was not carrying any identification.^[23] Martin's father, Tracy Martin, called to file a Missing Persons report early on February 27 and police officers arrived at his fiancée's condo with photographs of his dead son around 9:20 am.^[23][121]

Witness accounts[link]

A witness to the confrontation just prior to the shooting stated that Martin was on top of Zimmerman and punching him, while Zimmerman was yelling for help. This witness, who identified himself as "John", stated that "the guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help! Help!' and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911".^[123] He went on to say that when he got upstairs and looked down, "the guy who was on the top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point.".^[123][124]

A 13-year-old boy walking his dog saw a man on the ground shortly before the shooting and identified him as wearing red.^{[125][126][127]} His mother later disputed the testimony and claimed that the police pressured him into choosing what color the man was wearing, and that her son could not see any details in the dark. She also stated that the police waited five days before requesting to even question her son and said the lead homicide investigator told her he did not believe the shooting was self defense.^[128][68]

Mary Cutcher and her roommate, Selma Mora Lamilla, appeared on AC 360 and Cutcher stated that she believes "there was no punching, no hitting going on at the time, no wrestling" just prior to the shooting, but admitted that she neither saw the shooting nor the preceding altercation.^{[129][130][131]} Cutcher and her roommate heard the pair in their backyard and a "very young voice" whining, with no sounds of a fight. They heard a gunshot; the crying stopped immediately, and they saw Zimmerman on his knees straddling Martin on the ground.^[129][131] Mary Cutcher phoned police after the fatal shooting and said the black man was standing over another man, although Trayvon Martin was already dead.^[132] According to the Orlando Sentinel article, "Police spokesman Sgt. Dave Morgenstern [on March 15] issued a statement disputing Cutcher's version of events, calling her statements to WFTV "inconsistent with her sworn testimony to police."^[133] However, Cutcher and her roommate maintain that their account of the incident to the police did not agree with Zimmerman's, and they demanded the police retract that incorrect statement.^[130]

On March 29, 2012, an eyewitness referred to as a male said that he saw two men on the ground scuffling, then heard the shooting, and saw Zimmerman walk away with no blood on him.^[134][135] The witness later appeared on CNN AC360 referred to as a female, giving more details on her account. She pointed out that she heard an argument between a younger and an older voice. The whole time she witnessed the incident the scuffling happened on the grass. She said that the larger man, who walked away after the gunshot, was on top, and that it was too dark to see blood on his face.^[136]

A witness who arrived shortly after the shooting revealed photos he took that night that showed "blood trickling down the back of Zimmerman's head from two cuts. It also shows a possible contusion forming on the crown of his head". In revealing the photo to ABC News in mid-April, he noted he heard but didn't see the scuffle, but was one of the first to arrive, and was the first to talk to Zimmerman after the shooting.^[18]

After the prosecutors made some discovery information available, the Orlando Sentinel quoted an eye witness statement which said a man had "witnessed a black male, wearing a dark colored 'hoodie' on top of a white or Hispanic male who was yelling for help." The witness said the black male was throwing punches "MMA [mixed martial arts] style." After hearing a "pop," he saw the black male "laid out on the grass."^[137][138] When the witness was interviewed several weeks later, after giving his first statement, he thought the black male was either punching or pinning the lighter skinned male underneath him. He was no longer certain who was calling for help, having not seen their mouths in the dark. He was still certain that the black male had been on top of the lighter-skinned male.^[139]

Martin's mother says the shouting for help heard on some of the 9-1-1 calls is her son's voice.^[140] Zimmerman's father, along with other relatives, have reviewed the 9-1-1 calls and identified the person screaming for help as Zimmerman.^[141] In a report, lead investigator Serino said that on Feb. 28, two days after the shooting, he played the 911 tapes for Tracy Martin, Trayvon's father. "I asked Mr. Martin if the voice calling for help was that of his son. Mr. Martin, clearly emotionally impacted by the recording, quietly responded 'No.'" Martin has since told reporters he was uncertain at that time, but that when he heard an enhanced recording on March 16 he was convinced it was his son calling for help.^[142] Martin's mother's perspective is relied upon in Corey's Affidavit of Probable Cause for second degree murder. The Zimmerman family perspective is not mentioned in the charging document.^[143]

Sanford police station[link]

The back of Zimmerman's head at the police station.^[144]

After arriving at the police station, Zimmerman was placed in an interview room where he was interviewed by Investigator D. Singleton.^[14][145] The gun, a black Kel-Tec PF-9 9mm semi-automatic pistol, taken from Zimmerman at the scene, was placed into evidence.^[15][146] Sometime after 11:21 AM Crime Scene Tech D. Smith photographed Zimmerman's injuries and hands and used a Gunshot Residue Kit to collect GSR in Interview Room 2 at Sanford PD. Zimmerman's clothes were taken as evidence after his wife arrived with a change of clothes.^[147]

Zimmerman was not administered a drug or alcohol test.^[17] Peter Bella, a retired Chicago Police forensic investigator, stated in an article for the Washington Times, "Except for DUIs, police cannot test suspects for drugs or alcohol, unless the accused demands or consents to it, or they get a warrant".^{[148][149][150]}

He also underwent voice stress analysis, a type of lie detector test, which he passed, and the day after the shooting he re-enacted the incident for police.^[119]

The lead homicide investigator on the case, Chris Serino, filed an affidavit the night of the incident saying he was unconvinced by Zimmerman's account and recommending charging Zimmerman with manslaughter, but was informed by State Attorney Wolfinger's office that there was not enough evidence to obtain a conviction.^[21] Zimmerman was eventually released without charges.^[17] TheGrio.com reported that Wolfinger met with police leaders on the night of the shooting while Zimmerman was still in police custody,^[151] but Wolfinger denies this.^[77] Instead, his spokesman said, police consulted that night with the prosecutor on call, Kelly Jo Hines.^[152]

George Zimmerman's account of events[link]

On the night of the shooting, and afterwards, Zimmerman described in detail, for the police and others, what took place.^{[141][153][154][155]}

Zimmerman said he was driving to the grocery store when he spotted Trayvon Martin walking through the neighborhood. Zimmerman's father said that, while his son was not on duty that night as Neighborhood Watch captain, there had been many break-ins and he thought it suspicious that someone he didn't recognize was walking behind the town homes instead of on the street or the sidewalk. Zimmerman therefore called a non-emergency police line to report Martin's behavior and summon police.^[156][157] During the call, Zimmerman told the dispatcher that Martin was "coming to check me out."^[10] A source to the Orlando Sentinel said that Zimmerman later told investigators that at one point Martin was circling his vehicle, and he rolled up his window to avoid a confrontation.^[153]

After telling the police dispatcher that Martin "ran,"^[10] Zimmerman left his vehicle and followed him on foot.^[153] The dispatcher confirmed that Zimmerman was following Martin and then said, "OK, we don't need you to do that." Zimmerman replied with "OK" and stated that Martin got away.^[10] After a discussion about where Zimmerman would meet police, the call ended, and Zimmerman told investigators he was returning to his vehicle when Martin approached him from his left rear and confronted him.^[153][154] According to Zimmerman's father, Martin asked Zimmerman, "Do you have a fucking problem?" Zimmerman replied "No, I don't have a problem", and while Zimmerman reached for his cell phone Martin said, "Well, you do now" or something similar,^[141][154] then punched him in the face, knocking him down, and began beating his head against the sidewalk.^[153][154] Zimmerman said he called out for help while being beaten, and at one point Martin covered his mouth to muffle the screams.^[153][154] According to Zimmerman's father, during the struggle while Martin was on top of Zimmerman, Martin saw the gun his son was carrying and said something to the effect of “You’re gonna die now” or “You’re gonna die tonight” and continued to beat Zimmerman.^[141] Zimmerman and Martin struggled over the gun, and Zimmerman shot Martin once in the chest at close range, in self-defense.^{[153][154][155][Note 4]}

Phone recordings[link]

Recordings of eight calls to the police made on the night of the shooting were released by the Sanford police on March 17, 2012.^[106][158] Early press reports incorrectly indicated that the recordings included the sound of a single shot followed by a voice pleading or begging for help, and then a second shot, after which the voice immediately stopped. Later reports indicate that the gun was fired only once.^[159] Zimmerman told police at the scene that he had cried out for help.^[154] The statement was corroborated by an eyewitness who said that Martin was on top of Zimmerman, beating him, as Zimmerman called for help.^[123] One witness, who had only heard but not seen the events, believed Martin was the one calling for help, and said that the police tried to get her to change her testimony to their assertion that it was Zimmerman calling for help.^[160]

Independent experts vary in their interpretations of the low-quality audio of the phone recordings.^[161]The FBI was not able to determine whether it was Zimmerman or Martin who could be heard crying out for help in 911 calls, citing both poor audio quality and "the extreme emotional state of the person screaming."^[162][163]

Ongoing investigation[link]

Zimmerman was originally not charged with any crime. He asserted the right of self-defense and investigators said they could find no evidence disproving that assertion.^[16][164] The State Attorney's office and Police Chief Lee said they did not have enough evidence to arrest Zimmerman. "In this case Mr. Zimmerman has made the statement of self-defense," Lee said. "Until we can establish probable cause to dispute that, we don't have the grounds to arrest him." In response to criticisms of the investigation, Lee responded that "We are taking a beating over this" and defended the investigation.^[165] "This is all very unsettling. I'm sure if George Zimmerman had the opportunity to relive Sunday, February 26, he'd probably do things differently. I'm sure Trayvon would, too."^[55]

On March 20, 2012, State attorney Norm Wolfinger announced that a Seminole County grand jury would be convened on April 10, to investigate the death of Martin.^{[166][167][168]} However, State attorney Angela Corey, who was assigned to the case by Governor Rick Scott, stated that her office, not a grand jury, would decide whether to press charges in the shooting death of Martin. Angela Corey stated that, "I always lean towards moving forward without needing the grand jury in a case like this, I foresee us being able to make a decision, and move on it on our own."^[80] Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi said that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) was involved and "no stone will be left unturned in this investigation."^[167]

Medical records and autopsy[link]

On May 15, 2012 ABC News reported that a medical report compiled by the family physician of George Zimmerman showed that, following the alleged altercation with Martin, Zimmerman was diagnosed with a closed fracture of his nose, two black eyes, lacerations to the back of his head, a minor back injury, and bruising in his upper lip and cheek. According to the report, prior to the shooting Zimmerman had been prescribed Adderall and Temazepam. ^[169]

Martin's autopsy report was also released in May 2012.^[170] The examiner found the cause of death was a single gunshot wound of the chest, classifying the manner of death as "homicide". There were perforations of the heart and one lung, collapse of both lungs, and hemorrhaging in the pleural cavity. The examiner considered the bullet to have been fired "directly, front to back". There was no exit wound.

In looking at the entrance wound, the examiner assessed the gunshot as one fired from "intermediate range", which can mean from 1 to 18 inches, according to a forensics expert.^[171] The examiner noted "soot, ring abrasion, and a 2 x 2 inch area of stippling".

Besides the fatal gunshot wound, the examiner also noted a "1/4 by 1/8 inch small abrasion on the left fourth finger".

The autopsy report stated that Martin had trace levels of THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, in his blood and urine.^[172][173] The toxicology report found the levels to be 1.5 nanograms/ml of THC and 7.3 nanograms/ml of THC-COOH, a metabolite of THC that can stay in the system for weeks after cannabis has been smoked.^[172][173] Larry Kobilinsky, a professor of forensic science stated that the THC amount was so low that it may have been ingested days earlier and played no role in Martin's behavior. "This kind of level can be seen days after somebody smokes".^[174]

Federal investigation[link]

On March 20, 2012, the Justice Department announced that it was opening investigations into the incident.^[175] The state governor, Rick Scott, has asked the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to investigate the shooting.^[176][177]

President Barack Obama, speaking to reporters on March 23 after federal investigators were deployed to Sanford, said, "When I think about this boy, I think about my own kids, and I think every parent in America should be able to understand why it is absolutely imperative that we investigate every aspect of this," and, "If I had a son, he would look like Trayvon."^[178]

The FBI opened a parallel investigation into whether Martin's civil rights were violated, and interviewed witnesses and looked into Zimmerman's background.^[179]

Court proceedings[link]

Zimmerman was taken into custody on April 11, 2012, after being charged with second-degree murder in the Florida courts.^[1]

Charges[link]

On April 11, Florida State Attorney Angela Corey, the special prosecutor, announced that George Zimmerman had been charged with second-degree murder.^[180] In Florida, that charge carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment and a minimum sentence of 25 years. She reported that Zimmerman had turned himself in to law enforcement and was arrested and placed in custody.^[1]

Pre-trial[link]